Why teams shouldn't pick RBs in first round of the draft (new from SteelCityStats)

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

What you say is true, however it's not the point. The point is that there is not much drop off between the first through third round running backs (see the confidence interval chart), especially when you remove AP's stats. Shame on the franchise that reaches and overspends on a position where there is so much fungibility. Unless you can guarantee you're going to turn a back into Peterson, you should wait until the 2nd round to grab a back...and he'd better be good at receiving also.

You can't just look at the 8/20 fact, albeit it's tempting to. I can counterpoint it with these (which are qualitative in nature - not quantitative because I can't prove they're significant):
- 4 of the top 10 RBs (in terms of rushing yards) are on losing teams, including the team with the first overall pick this draft
- all 4 of the conference championship game teams (ATL, BAL, SF, NE) have starting RBs that are from the 2nd round or higher in the draft.
- Ray Rice is the highest drafted player of those 4 teams and he was 55th overall (almost 3rd round)

These are Chadman's favourite types of discussion- comments backed up with facts & theories. Nice stuff. Chadman, for the record- completely agrees that the drop-off from Round 1 to Round 2 or even 3 is nowhere near as significant as it may have been in the past- there are good players everywhere in a draft, and teams are doing better jobs finding them.

These are Chadman's favourite types of discussion- comments backed up with facts & theories. Nice stuff. Chadman, for the record- completely agrees that the drop-off from Round 1 to Round 2 or even 3 is nowhere near as significant as it may have been in the past- there are good players everywhere in a draft, and teams are doing better jobs finding them.

If there is a CJ Spiller type RB at #17 I would take him in a heartbeat.

The Steelers need a back that can get yards after contact (IMO) and I'm not certain, but Spiller is a guy that looks to outrun defenders or make them miss. I would love to have a 20 carry a game back that has forward lean, delivers a bit of a hit himself and rarely is tackled for a loss with the first hit. I know Dwyer and Redmond have these abilities, but neither of them have the ability to carry the ball 20 times a game for 16 games or more. That's why I like Lacy (I know he didn't average 20 carries a game) I think he can be that guy. The running game needs to sustain drives and force the defense to make tackles which will open up the passing game. You score points in the passing game for the most part and the running game needs to be a viable option to at least force the defense to play both pass and run. I doubt one team the Steelers played this year cared how many times Dwyer, Redmond, Batch or Mendenhall carried the ball, they defended Ben and the passing game to stop the Steelers.

IMO RB is the toughest position to evaluate because they each play under vastly different circumstances. Lacy is a perfect example.....

Pro: He did it playing with the best and delivered in the biggest games.

Con: He ran behind a group of behemoths who opened huge holes for him and wore down defenses.

Both arguments are valid. Then you have the Alfred Morris, Fred Jackson types. Nobody ever saw them play but I'm guessing that there was a good chance that often the first defenser that they met was in the backfield. Look at our own Willie Parker. He never saw the field at NC. Was that because he wasn't good enough or because the coaches had their favorites who they already were comfortable playing? Whatever the reason, we do know that FWP was an NFL RB, but I don't know who played ahead of him in college.

IMO RB is the toughest position to evaluate because they each play under vastly different circumstances. Lacy is a perfect example.....

Pro: He did it playing with the best and delivered in the biggest games.

Con: He ran behind a group of behemoths who opened huge holes for him and wore down defenses.

Both arguments are valid. Then you have the Alfred Morris, Fred Jackson types. Nobody ever saw them play but I'm guessing that there was a good chance that often the first defenser that they met was in the backfield. Look at our own Willie Parker. He never saw the field at NC. Was that because he wasn't good enough or because the coaches had their favorites who they already were comfortable playing? Whatever the reason, we do know that FWP was an NFL RB, but I don't know who played ahead of him in college.

Parker was benched in favor of Ronnie McGill who I never heard of, Parker an undrafted player got a SB ring and McGill didn't even get a phone call from the NFL. Just like Franco Harris had to play behind Lydell Mitchell and Franco has 4 rings.

There is always a back thats overlooked, just ask the Texans when they got Foster.

In full agreement with you on this...we certainly don't need to be spending a first-round pick on a RB.

That's good, because not a single RB is slated to be taken in the first round. None. So it's highly doubtful we would use our 1st round pick on a RB, but definitely could see us using a 2nd or 3rd on a back, for sure.